The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Oklahoma Bill Would Specially Target Hispanic Gang Members
No, you can't do that.
From HB 3133, introduced Tuesday by Oklahoma state Rep. Justin Humphrey:
Any person who:
1. Is of Hispanic descent living within the state of Oklahoma;
2. Is a member of a criminal street gang as such term is defined in subsection F of Section 856 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes; and
3. Has been convicted of a gang-related offense enumerated in paragraphs one (1) through sixteen (16) of subsection F of Section 856 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes, shall be deemed to have committed an act of terrorism as such term is defined in Section 1268.1 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes.Any and all property, including real estate and personal property, conveyances, including aircraft, vehicles or vessels, monies, coins and currency, or other instrumentality used or intended to be used, in any manner or part, by said person shall be subject to forfeiture as provided in Section 1738 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes.
Though I don't think it's particularly helpful to conflate "criminal street gang" membership (bad as it is) with terrorism, a state may indeed do so, and may authorize forfeiture of instruments of crime as well (subject to the usual procedural constraints applicable to forfeiture). But a state certainly may not set up different rules for criminal street gangs run by Hispanics, by whites, by blacks, by Asians, or by any other ethnic or racial group.
Rep. Humphrey has apologized, and said he would change the language to "undocumented illegals." But it's hard to see the explicit ethnic classification in the original bill as just an innocent mistake.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I would use words other than "undocumented illegal" out of fear that judges would pretend not to understand it. Changing it to "alien not lawfully present in the United States" still risks intruding on the federal government's exclusive power to regulate immigration.
Any reference to alien still risks Leftist judges claiming it doesn't apply because they're human and not from extra terrestrial origin.
I think that's deviously brilliant. You say "undocumented" so a left wing judge will know who you mean and "illegal" so a right wing judge will also know who you mean.
The rest of this statute, though, should go in the garbage.
"Though I don't think it's particularly helpful to conflate "criminal street gang" membership (bad as it is) with terrorism"
When that kind of blatant discrimination is reserved for white Christians.
Pathetic sniveling
Yes, you are.
Thanks for conceding.
When I'm sniveling, you'll know it. It'll probably start with something about the collapse of the Eagles.
Back around the 2000s Cambridge, Massachusetts hired a police consultant who said that Hispanic people used a lot of pepper in cooking and were less affected by pepper spray as a result. In other words, give Hispanics more pepper spray to make sure. The city did not take his advice.
Rep. Humphrey has apologized,
Really?
“I apologize for just using the word Hispanic, but I was not wrong. Again, these are Hispanic. Reality is they are Hispanic. There’s nothing to be ashamed with,” said Rep. Humphrey.
That doesn't sound like much of an apology. I agree he used the word "apologize," but other than that it's BS.
It's right up there with a "I'm sorry I got caught"-type non-apology.
Don't tell me you're sorry 'cause you're not.
Oh baby you are only sorry you got caught....
He was very specific about what he was apologizing for, which was not what he should have apologized for.
Well, when the Swedish Bikini Team become a problem, then he can name Swedes.
If the gangs are all racially specific -- and they tend to be -- than it is racist to NOT identify them by race. At least until they start admitting Gringos....
"If the gangs are all racially specific — and they tend to be — than it is racist to NOT identify them by race"
What an odd notion. It's racist to say 'Yakuza' instead of 'Japanese Yakuza'? 'MS-13' instead of 'Hispanic MS-13'? 'Crips' instead of 'Black Crips'? 'Hells Angels' instead of 'Cacausian Hells Angels'? Is that the way you actually talk?
Janitor Ed bleats:
(emphasis added). FFS this isn't a hard concept. No one is complaining about "identification".
Using an "accurate descriptive label" is Constitutional. Speechy, even! That's not what the proposed legislation did.
Having different statutory punishments for otherwise identical conduct because one person is accurately identified as "Japanese" and a second person is accurately identified as "Hispanic" is frackin' NOT Constitutional.
Re-read that until you understand what the problem is. Hint: it's not the one you're making up in your head.
Re-read that until you understand what the problem is.
Unwarranted optimism.
I'm guilty as charged.
I like to see the positive in humanity. While still calling out Janitor Ed for being an actual idiot who [can't | refuses to] understand the Constitution.
Was just thinkin to myself, they... can't do that. Can they?
Opening line post title:
"No, you can't do that."
EV's been a teacher for a long time. 🙂
Long enough, from UCLA's perspective.
You're just jealous.... 😛
Jealous with respect to what?
With respect to respect: he's respected, and you're not.
There's more to life than the disaffected clingerverse, thank goodness.
Not to your life.
Nor to yours, it seems.
Keep clinging.
Until replacement.
Kirkland, he got PROMOTED....
He appreciates that comment even more than he would have welcomed your use of a vile racial slur.
People are especially grateful for kind words, even if fanciful, when they’re down and out.
Live version.
But it's hard to see the explicit ethnic classification in the original bill as just an innocent mistake.
Consider the odds. What's the race/ethnicity of the majority of the illegals in the US?
You’re right. The “updated” version of the bill is also very racist.
A number of EU TV crime series episodes refer to mafia or criminal gangs by country designation, Albanian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Russian. Law enforcement and Interpol at least in the shows has no issue with this. And, Sicilian Mafia remains a theme in Italian TV.
What folks see on TV is pretty much the touchstone for gun policy preferences, so why not for everything else?
Sure, but they don’t get locked up extra long if they’re from the wrong country.
So Oklahoma whites massacred the blacks in Tulsa and massacred the Osage. They cannot seem to get over there being brown people in their midst. Probably need to relocate the whites to a reservation for the safety of everyone
STATES RANKED BY EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
(includes territories; 52 jurisdictions ranked)
COLLEGE DEGREE*
Oklahoma 45
ADVANCED DEGREE*
Oklahoma 48
REPUBLICAN REGISTRATION
Oklahoma 4
*these figures include degrees from low-quality, nonsense-based schools and therefore may overstate educational attainment in less advanced jurisdictions
Oil is the only thing keeping Oklahoma from being Liberia...or Alabama
Is Oklahoma better than Alabama? In what way(s)?
Not sure. I think Oklahoma lacks Drackman
You don't figure a few members of the Volokh Conspiracy's collection of misfits, faux libertarians, and bigots are Oklahomans? Railing about the government while using a government-subsidized internet connection in a government-subsidized community?
I've been to 47 of Barry Hussein's 57 States, the only ones missing are AK, HA, and..........
OK
I speak 2 languages Fluently (OK, maybe Engrish not so much) and I can sound like an Idiot in Hebrew (In Tel Aviv I tried to order an Old Fashioned, came out as "weathered Shoe") have a Professional Degree, and got shot at in Combat (by our own side, the bullets don't know)
Oh, and I know I'm late on the rent for that space in your Head I'm obviously living in...
Frank
You're a sad man with a serious thought disorder, probably schizophrenia, who trolls the Internet as an inexpensive hobby. Some of these guys may be too sheltered or extremely online to notice, but I've known half a dozen men just like you. Two of them also even "ex-military doctor" as their online personas. Your diction is a clear giveaway.
"Rent-free space in your head" is your goal, but I promise nobody thinks about you except when you're annoying in the moment.
I don't know Frank Drackman, so I can't speak to the correctness of your very confident diagnosis. But I do sometimes lay awake at night thinking about him, so I know your statement about everybody else is incorrect.
You've "known half a dozen men just like me??"
(I'm thinking it's more.)
"Nobody thinks about me??"
You obviously have, if you're comparing me to "half a dozen me" (I'm thinking it's more)
Oh hey, that rent I owe you? it's in the mail
Frank
I want to hear about the friendly fire -- I thought you were a MD...
"On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog." springs to mind every time whats-his-name does his "dumbed-down doctor" cosplay.
OK, you do know that the US Military has Doctors? and when the Military goes to war the Doctors go to war? And the Marine Corpse has always used the most junior Navy Doctors (Occasionally a Crazy more senior Doctor) in the most dangerous Doctor Positions, "Battalion Surgeon" (You're not a Surgeon but it sounds cool) for Infantry, Artillery, Tank (Last Marine Corpse Commandants got rid of the Tanks, stupid move) Battalions.
You're not as up front as the Company Corpse-men (HT Barry Obama) but you're not far behind.
"Friendly Fire" (Rule of Combat #42 there is no such thing as Friendly Fire, Rule #43, if the enemy is in range, so are you, .....)
happened when another Marine Corpse Light Armored Vehicle mistook our vehicles as Iraqi and opened up with its 25mm Chain gun,
It missed us, but I would have shat my pants if I wasn't stove up from eating MRE's for months.
Frank
“But a state certainly may not set up different rules for criminal street gangs run by Hispanics, by whites, by blacks, by Asians, or by any other ethnic or racial group.”
Why not? They set up different rules for other groups that are defined by race.
What valid and actually-enforced* criminal statutes that textually provide for different raced-based penalties for the identical crime are you currently hallucinating?
Cites, please.
Kindly provide an apples-to-apples comparison, not some vague and unsupported ipse dixit about "rules" that you pulled straight outta your posterior orifice.
*that is, not a Jim Crow-era law that hasn't been enforced since the 1960s, but some hayseed county in Alabama still hasn't managed to remove from the books.
Oh look
[crickets]
Put up or STFU.
.
Does "I was not wrong" constitute an apology among conservative bigots?
Did Joe Pa smell like old sweat socks? You were there!
California just signed the "Ebony Alert" act into force. Specifically just looking for Black missing persons.
https://sd35.senate.ca.gov/news/2023-10-09-governor-signs-senator-bradford%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cebony-alert%E2%80%9D-legislation-help-bring-home-missing
There's a certain amount of twisted irony to California passing a law that specifically looks for black missing peoples and send out law enforcement in search of them to bring them back...
Because missing black people get zero media coverage
Common-Law Harris has been missing for the last 3 years.
That may be true, but it still seems an equal protection violation if it's based on race and not on neutral criteria like "the media isn't reporting this particular disappearance."
Here is the abridged version,* as intended to be understood at the ballot box:
Any person who: 1. Is of Hispanic descent living within the state of Oklahoma . . . . shall be deemed to have committed an act of terrorism as such term is defined in Section 1268.1 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes.
* Elliptically edited by me, as commentary. That is not what the statute really says in so many words.
So this is your first regulation for 'lathropistan'? Sounds about right.
Here is the law listing the predicate offenses. Only 1-16 are off limits to Hispanics under the bill. Note that simple assault is included.
"Criminal street gang" means any ongoing organization, association, or group of five or more persons that specifically either promotes, sponsors, or assists in, or participates in, and requires as a condition of membership or continued membership, the commission of one or more of the following criminal acts:
1. Assault, battery, or assault and battery with a deadly weapon, as defined in Section 645 of this title;
2. Aggravated assault and battery as defined by Section 646 of this title;
3. Robbery by force or fear, as defined in Sections 791 through 797 of this title;
4. Robbery or attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon or imitation firearm, as defined by Section 801 of this title;
5. Unlawful homicide or manslaughter, as defined in Sections 691 through 722 of this title;
6. The sale, possession for sale, transportation, manufacture, offer for sale, or offer to manufacture controlled dangerous substances, as defined in Section 2-101 et seq. of Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes;
7. Trafficking in illegal drugs, as provided for in the Trafficking in Illegal Drugs Act, Section 2-414 of Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes;
8. Arson, as defined in Sections 1401 through 1403 of this title;
9. The influence or intimidation of witnesses and jurors, as defined in Sections 388, 455 and 545 of this title;
10. Theft of any vehicle, as described in Section 1720 of this title;
11. Rape, as defined in Section 1111 of this title;
12. Extortion, as defined in Section 1481 of this title;
13. Transporting a loaded firearm in a motor vehicle, in violation of Section 1289.13 of this title;
14. Possession of a concealed weapon, as defined by Section 1289.8 of this title;
15. Shooting or discharging a firearm, as defined by Section 652 of this title;
16. Soliciting, inducing or enticing another to commit an act of prostitution, as defined by Section 1030 of this title;
17. Human trafficking, as defined by Section 748 of this title; or
18. Possession of a firearm after former conviction of a felony, as defined by Section 1283 of this title.
And what this means is that, if considered terrorism, they are punishable by up to life imprisonment, that is, if you are someone Humphrey dislikes.
The definition of terrorism is:
“Terrorism” means one or more kidnappings or other act of violence, or a series of acts of violence, resulting in damage to property, personal injury or death, or the threat of such act or acts that appears to be intended: a. to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, b. to influence the policy or conduct of a government by intimidation or coercion, or c. in retaliation for the policy or conduct of a government by intimidation or coercion.
Why should, all other facts being the same, including criminal gang membership, a Hispanic be called out for increased punishment over a white person, or anyone else for that matter? Should a non-Hispanic get less sentence?
One would hope the answer to your Q is self-evident, but there appear to be folks who genuinely agree that the proposed legislation is a good idea.
They are fools.
One of the more memorable lessons my Con Law II prof kept hammering - for good reason, I think! - is to consider what happens if the shoe is on the other foot; what are the implication of your constitutional rule/interpretation if someone else gets to write the law, and you/your preferred cause is the target?
In this case, anyone who thinks "it's constitutional to punish Hispanics more than Whites for identical criminal conduct" should reflect that once you go down that road ... it's also constitutional to punish Whites more than Hispanics for identical criminal conduct.
Answers:
1. No rational reason. But to bigots like Humphrey that doesn't matter.
2. No.
Until there is a finding that undocumented immigrants are prone to gang activity, this statute violates Equal Protection. And of course there will not be such a finding.
The motivation is obviously racist. My first thought about undocumented people is that they are more law abiding than most people. Someone in danger of deportation is going to keep his head down. And this is certainly true of the undocumented people I know in my town.
But the first thought of the drafters of this law is that brown people = violence.
"My first thought about undocumented people is that they are more law abiding than most people. "
Well, except for the whole "undocumented" part where they are illegally in the country. Except for that part.
Armchair : “Well, except for the whole “undocumented” part…”
Touché on that! On the other hand, it’s a well-known fact that immigrants – both legal and illegal – commit crimes at a fraction of the rate of native-born citizens. Let’s use the Cato Institute’s statistical review :
“The results are similar to our other work on illegal immigration and crime in Texas. In 2018, the illegal immigrant criminal conviction rate was 782 per 100,000 illegal immigrants, 535 per 100,000 legal immigrants, and 1,422 per 100,000 native‐born Americans. The illegal immigrant criminal conviction rate was 45 percent below that of native‐born Americans in Texas. The general pattern of native‐born Americans having the highest criminal conviction rates followed by illegal immigrants and then with legal immigrants having the lowest holds for all of other specific types of crimes such as violent crimes, property crimes, homicide, and sex crimes.”
(note : I dug up these numbers previously when someone – I think our favorite Ohioian Bob – accepted as a unreflective given that brown-skin people were all blood-thirsty brutes. And fearing the sting of an inevitable right-wing retort, I (just) remembered to add the caveat about illegal status itself. The greater truth holds though: A fraction of the crime rate. Makes ya wonder what these Oklahomans are all about! Perhaps that wind sweeping across the plain wears on a person’s mind…..)
https://www.cato.org/blog/new-research-illegal-immigration-crime-0
In your book, "native-born American" means not "brown-skin people"? Maybe you should look at the demographics of the (single) state that informed that study.
I'm also not sure that counting convictions is an unbiased way to estimate demographics of people who commit crimes. It would tend to omit people who have practice at evading government authorities.
Counting convictions likely undercounts white criminals, who are offered deferrals and diversion programs at a much higher rate than minorities, even on the same charges and similar facts.
Ah.
White criminals are stupid, but Hispanic criminals are smart. OK.
So you're another one who thinks only white people can be "native-born Americans". Noted.
Except for Moe-hammed Atta and his 40 thieves, the Shoe Bomber Richard Reid, and more murders by "Ricardo, Rico, Jose, Manuel, Alejandro, Diego, Franciso, Guadalupe, Pedro, Tomas," than you can shake a Taco at.
Frank
The illegal alien bit (I'm old school) wasn't even in the original bill, so obviously Humphrey was motivated by racism.
Thank god they are that stupid.
"Thank god they are that stupid."
I agree the guy who wrote that law is an idiot. But which "they" are you speaking of now?
Who do you think?
I can think of a few different group identities. You might be thinking of one or more of them. Why don't you tell me, so I don't have to play "Guess Which Group of People I Was Implicitly Despising In This Sentence?"
Ironically, there's a good chance you dislike "those people" because of how disrespectfully they treat one group or others.
I have a gay friend who years ago moved from New York to New Orleans. When he got there, he was surprised to see how many gay people were shamelessly bigoted about black people. Lesson learned: victims of bigotry are not necessarily any less bigoted than anybody else.
I didn't respond directly to your question because I didn't think my comment required an explanation. My original comment was about the motivation of Rep. Justin Humphreys, so in my mind the only rational interpretation of the word, "they" in my comment could have been "those people who did/do/would support Humphreys' bill".
I do dislike racists, but not exclusively.
In a quick attempt to find a single co-sponsor or supporter in the Oklahoma House, I came up with nothing. So I don't think "they" are a material factor. It looks like it may actually be only one idiot in the Oklahoma House.
Of course, according to the SCOTUS changing those two words means it's totally not racist and therefore constitutional.
Clingers gonna cling. Bigots gonna bigot.
Conservatives gonna lose the culture war and be replaced.
Jerry Sandusky's gonna Jerry Sandusky
So, nothing but love for Salvis gangsters and southeast Asian gangsters?
I have a hard time believing some of the dumb-ass comments above aren't complete, conscious, "own the libs" weak-sauce trolling.
Constitutional:
- calling a violent gang of French people "French gangsters"
- calling a violent gang of German people "German gangsters"
... because that's descriptive of origins and affiliations.
NOT Constitutional:
- writing a law that says "for the same conduct, 'French gangsters' get a baguette and a bottle of red wine, and 'German gangsters' get sentenced as terrorists."
... because that's a no-brainer violation of the 14th Amendment.
This isn't really that hard.
But the French gangsters are charming, and much worse at gangstering, so they do less damage.
That reminds me - it's been years since I've seen "The French Connection". Should add it to my re-watch list.
Might want to watch it before Big Brother bans it, has some very "Un-woke" Dialog...
Frank "Never Trust a (insert ethnic group here)"
I rewatched it recently. I'd place it in the category of "films that did not age well".
Speaking of criminal gangs . . . disciplinary actions have been filed against three more members of Trump Litigation: Elite Strike Force.
That report indicates disgraced, un-American wingnut John Eastman -- a criminal defendant in Georgia who has been found culpable with respect to professional misconduct in California and is begging for money these days -- should have punishment imposed with respect to the disciplinary proceeding soon.
No one let @TrumpLatinos know about this.
I think we're safe from Rep. Justin Humphrey being nominated to national office.
I used to think Amuricans would never elect A-rab Terrorists, but now we have Ra-shiita Hijab, Ilhan Mullah Omar, Andre the mental Giant (not) Carson, Rafael Warlock (Peace be upon Him), Hakeem the Bad Dream Jefferson, and it was Barry Hussein Himself who thanked John McCain for not making an Ish-yew of his "Muslim Faith"
Frank
Just remember that "racist" is anything that the Liberals want to whine about.
Were your parents bigots, jimc5499, or is this some sort of rebellion against decent parents?
There is some truth to the fact that taking advantage of the "flexible" meaning of certain words and phrases can be problematic, but the accuracy of the term, "racist", in this case is fairly obvious by Rep. Humpheys' conspicuous use of an ethnic classification in his originally proposed Bill. He didn't even try to tie it to immigration status.
Perhaps calling him an "ethnicist" would have been more accurate (if you're of the "Hispanic is not a race!" school), but the sad fact is that in public communications one must use words people understand. And everyone knows (despite your protestations) what a "racist" is.
The problem is not Hispanics, but mestizos. Nobody has an issue with 100% Spanish blood people from Argentina or Cuba, but nobody wants Incans and Mayans, who have 80 IQs, genetic propensities to violence and alcohol addiction, and other social ills.
What kind of dumbass is Justin Humphrey?
Reportedly, this kind of dumbass:
> proposed a bigfoot hunting season, including a $3 million bounty for a bigfoot delivered unharmed to Oklahoma authorities
> proposed decriminalization of cockfighting (after taking money from a pro-cockfighting group)
> proposed banning furries from schools, specifying that animal control officials would remove furries from school premises (I hesitate to mention this one, fearing it might trigger the proprietor)
> proposed requiring women disclose the father's identify before seeking an abortion, and granting the father veto power over any abortion (in particular, requiring a woman to present written consent, regardless of whether the pregnancy resulted from rape)
> proposed neutering "furries"
> referred to pregnant women as "hosts" of the fetus
> proposed mandatory mental health counseling for furries (it seems furry is to this guy what transgender is to Prof. Volokh)
> proposed designating all Hispanic street gang members as terrorists (he said Chinese street gang members also are a problem, but omitted the Chinese part from his bill)
> claimed transgender people are mentally ill and that "there is no transgender"
> publicly opposed the use of litter boxes by schoolchildren
> filed a resolution against what are alleged to be Dominion Voting Systems' efforts to silence Tucker Carlson, stating in particular
.
> stated that Black Lives Matter resembles the Ku Klux Klan
Educated readers may not be surprised to learn this hayseed is a lifelong Oklahoman, worked for the Department of Corrections before running for public office, resides in a backwater town hours from civilization, is a worship leader at his Christian church; and is a white, male Republican.
Dang! Unless the Oklahoman doesn't exist or is making this up (always possible),
https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/politics/2024/01/18/who-is-justin-humphrey-oklahoma-furry-bill-departure-from-lawmakers-history/72266697007/
Rep. Humphrey's bill really is weird:
* * *
Ahead of the 2024 Oklahoma legislative session, Humphrey filed a bill targeting "furries," or people in a subculture interested in anthropomorphic animal characters, in Oklahoma schools.
Humphrey's bill, House Bill 3084, would ban "students who purport to be an imaginary animal or animal species, or who engage in anthropomorphic behavior commonly referred to as furries at school" from participating in class and school activities.
The bill would require parents or guardians to pick the student up from school. But, if parents are unable to pick the student up, the bill says "animal control services shall be contacted to remove the student."
In a video talking about the bill, Humphrey said he doesn’t wanna see kids using litter boxes, and that people have “lost their minds” by allowing students to “pretend to be animals” at school.
* * *
On the other hand, and contrary to all those Kirkland rants about places like Lane, Oklahoma being backwaters hours from civilization, it strikes me as entirely possible that Rep. Humphrey is displaying more irony than any Brooklyn hipster. Or maybe Brooklyn is hours from civilization too?
Maybe Rep. Humphrey was a member of Black Rock City Animal Control?
(BRC Animal Control was hilarious. They’d “capture”, collar/tag, and release people in furry costumes at Burning Man. They had an adoption clinic. see, e.g., https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelholden/5325428238 )
.
Are you a fan of the depleted human residue that remains in our left-behind backwaters after generations on the wrong side of bright flight? Do you like ignorance, addiction, superstition, bigotry, parasitism, dysfunction, indolence, resentment, more bigotry, disaffectedness, backwardness, more superstition, low-quality and nonsense-based schools, resentment, and even more bigotry?
What is wrong with you?
Unless I misread the bill, there is another problem: it confiscates all property used or intended to be used by the offender, whether or not it belongs to the offender and whether or not it is proceeds of crime or an instrument thereof. As I read it, if a gang member plans to borrow a friend's car for an innocent purpose, it is subject to forfeiture.
This law is absolutely constitutional. According to liberals, the 2nd Amendment only protects guns that existed in the 1780s. Therefore, the 14th Amendment only provides equal protection to groups who were in America in the 1860s. Hispanics weren't, not in any significant number.
More voltage!!
You mean this as a joke.
Rep. Humphrey just means it.
... Do you remember how and when Texas became a state?